The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Schneider 35mm and an IQ180

Don Libby

Well-known member
I'm doing long term planning here. I've searched and found some discussions regarding this subject and I'm slightly more confused than when I began. It looked like the SK35 and IQ180 didn't play well together then Phase upgraded their software in C1 and some thought it worked - to a point. I did the search a couple days ago for bear with me. It looked like (if I remember correctly) the last anyone spoke about this combination was sever months ago and still there weren't any conclusive thoughts.

We now have C1-7 and it's been some months since anyone has had anything meaningful to say. My thought process is this - switch to a HR40mm selling my SK35 then in time move up to the IQ180 from my IQ160. The only thing that stopped me before was the talk about how badly the SK35 performed. Then recently I began to see (from searching) that some who had the combo got it working.

So - what is it? Does the SK35 play well with the IQ180 or is it a lost cause and I need to think new glass if I want to go with the 180.

Your thoughts are welcome but I'm looking for actual hands on experience.

Don
 

goesbang

Member
Don, I used the 35XL extensively with my P65+ and was frankly, delighted with it. It needed the CF and was limited to about 10-12mm shift before LCC couldn't handle the correction without noticeable quality loss (either increased noise or loss of colour saturation was the problem). C1 7 LCC is better, but still desaturates.
On the IQ180, the 35XL just doesn't cut it for me. Lenscast is so severe due to the smaller pixels that realistic shift is down to 4-6mm which in this focal length is just not enough for me. Also, the critical sharpness is no match for my 23HR. This wasn't something I noticed on the 60MP back but it shows on the 80MP. Not enough that my clients would know the difference, but enough that I do.
Accordingly, my 35XL has a new owner who is delighted with its performance on his P45+ and I have a shiny new 40mm HR Alpagon short barrel, and what a beauty it is. I'm not sure what camera you run, but for me, the fact that the 40mm will fit on the new Alpa WA tilt adapter and the 35XL won't was also a consideration.
The 40 is a lot bulkier and heavier than the 35XL, but the sharpness and the useable image circle (real world, not manufacturer claimed) is a real winner.
BTW, if the Schneider 35 you refer to is not the 35XL but the older 35Apo Sironar digital, then the change to the 40HR-w is a no-brainer.
This is probably not what you want to hear given the cost of the upgrade, but at risk of being called an enabler, I think the move to the 40 is a worthwhile one.
Cheers,
 

malmac

Member
Don, I have the 35XL and an IQ180 with a Cambo WDS -

Unfortunately I don't have alternative lenses for the Cambo to compare it with but really I don't think the combination of the 35XL and IQ180 is a winner.

Have looked at getting an alternative lens but really just can't spare the cash to make the change at this point in time.

I would not sell my 35XL for someone to use on an IQ180 because I don't believe they would be happy - as I am not happy with the match.

By the way, it does have a CF and I do use LCCs and C1 v7 - so I think it is getting every chance to shine.


Regards


Mal
 

OliverM

Member
Hi, I am also willing to buy a 35-40 mm lens, sorry to pollute this thread as my needs are not for an IQ180 (my mid-term planning is rather a P65+ or a Aptus II-10).
I understand from the first opinions that the 35xl could be sufficient for my needs (max 60 MPix, I will rarely do more than 10-15 mm rise), and just hope the fall-off is not too visible at f8-f11.
Apart from technical answers to the IQ180 requirements, do you see a significant advantage of the 40 HR in terms of general look (colors, micro-contrast, textures, ...), that could also also be great for smaller backs ?
Price, size and weight will probably limit my choice to the 35xl, but sometimes I can be very irrational ...
Thank you !
Oliverm
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
My opinion:
With a P65+: Fantastic lens
With an IQ180 before the improved LCC math: Unusable, even straight on
With an IQ180 after the improved LCC math: Usable straight on and with maybe 5mm of movement

So yes, it was improved. But a Rodenstock 32mm HR is still a better match to an IQ180. Though it is heavier, more expensive, and has more distortion it's sharpness and low cast when shifted make it a stellar lens. Check out the full res image we have posted from Rodenstock 32HR.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Hi, I am also willing to buy a 35-40 mm lens, sorry to pollute this thread as my needs are not for an IQ180 (my mid-term planning is rather a P65+ or a Aptus II-10).
I understand from the first opinions that the 35xl could be sufficient for my needs (max 60 MPix, I will rarely do more than 10-15 mm rise), and just hope the fall-off is not too visible at f8-f11.
Apart from technical answers to the IQ180 requirements, do you see a significant advantage of the 40 HR in terms of general look (colors, micro-contrast, textures, ...), that could also also be great for smaller backs ?
Price, size and weight will probably limit my choice to the 35xl, but sometimes I can be very irrational ...
Thank you !
Oliverm
On an Aptus-II 10 I'd pick the 35XL any day.

If there is even a small chance you might upgrade to an Aptus-II 12 or IQ180 in the next few years then you may wish to take that into consideration: I'm a big proponent of selecting lenses that will be with you for many years. Switching lenses obviously costs money but less obviously makes you re-learn the way a scene will look through the new lens; like a runner wearing a new pair of shoes there is a break in period after a changeover before you no longer think about the equipment.
 

OliverM

Member
On an Aptus-II 10 I'd pick the 35XL any day.

If there is even a small chance you might upgrade to an Aptus-II 12 or IQ180 in the next few years then you may wish to take that into consideration: I'm a big proponent of selecting lenses that will be with you for many years. Switching lenses obviously costs money but less obviously makes you re-learn the way a scene will look through the new lens; like a runner wearing a new pair of shoes there is a break in period after a changeover before you no longer think about the equipment.

Hmm, good points ... I am confident that I will build up an Alpa system that I will use for a looong time, but I wonder if I can do this without too many trial & "mistakes". Also because I learn techniques and my needs change over this process.
If I can get a similar pop from the 35xl than the one I have with the Rodenstock HR Digaron-S 4.0/60 mm, I am confident I can live with it. But as I don't know how to explain what I mean with "pop", I guess I will have to try :)
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Thanks for the information.

We're currently doing long term planning/what if and part of this was an eventual upgrade to the IQ180. While I'm still tickled pink with the IQ160 the 180 does nevertheless offer a few extra benefits that makes it somewhat attractive.

I've been using the 35XL (w/CF) since I bought the WRS way back in October 2008 and found it a great lens for the P45 and P65 and now the IQ160. I wasn't willing to get rid of it back when I upgraded from the P65 and decided to upgrade instead to the 160. Things change however and I had hoped to be able to keep the lens with the 180 - doesn't look like it though.

I don't want to go wider as I often like to do wide panos and will need a lens that can shift similar to the 35XL thus I'm looking at the HR40. I figure I'd pick up the HR then get used to it before changing to the 180; selling the 35 in the process.

Another question if I may - does the HR40 require a CF like the SK35?

And to comment on Doug's thoughts. He's totally right. You need to think long term usage when picking a lens (or back). Had I known I was going to switch to a tech cam I'd of begun with a P45 instead of the P30. Likewise if I had any idea that an IQ back was being made (again that was over 4-years ago) I would have rethought my wide lens.

Once I decide the direction we go in I'll let you know. Also while the 35 isn't for sale now it will be if I decide on a replacement lens.

Don
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
No CF required (nor do I think there is even one available) for the HR40.
This lens is great; it barely needs an LCC, and typically just with movements, though I always shoot an LCC after each shot.

I love the the HR40 t/s on the Cambo!

That being said, just remember it wasn't me----but Bryan Siebel as your enabler...

:ROTFL:

ken
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
No worries Ken - you remain the Sr. Enabler. Brian is the Jr. Enabler. Then again most folks here fit that description....

Great news on the CF and the 35 is an XL.

Now I have to figure out if a need t/s. (although Sandy recently mentioned t/s in a conversation :D)

Don
 

goesbang

Member
Thank you Ken, I'll wear the enabler badge with pride, though I fear your rush to bestow the award may be in danger of competing with our dear friend Fred's rush to repost his fave GX680 stuff for predictability! :)
As usual, Doug gives very useful advice. Buy the best gear, buy it once and be done with it. Of course, we can't always predict where things will go. In this case, at the time many of us bought the 35XL, it was king of the heap and nobody knew the 5.2 micron backs would suffer the amount of lenscast they do. Unless you are very fickle (I'm lookin at YOU Mancuso!), most of your lenses will be much longer serving acquisitions than cameras or backs, so even if it means buying more performance than you think you need now, it will be prudent to step up a level if it is on the market.
Oliver, the 40 is appreciably sharper than the 35XL. The difference is just perceptible in the middle but obvious to even Blind Freddy at the edges, so I have no doubt you will love it on this score.
I always have a quiet giggle to myself when people get on a soapbox about the colour differences between current generation Schneider vs. Rodie lenses. It's so small you need a densitometer to measure it. If it's really that significant to you, it is a relatively simple matter to build a profile to give you the look you want. Stress not. There are subtle differences in how they render generally. I suspect one brand relies more on absolute resolving power and the other more on micro-contrast for their sharpness, but there are people more optically savvy than me here to have that discussion with. In the area I am most interested, namely the output files I can produce from my files, there is little meaningful difference, hence my signature line.
Don, I used to be firmly in the "hyper focal" method for all images with lenses below 45mm camp. Over time, my habit of jamming a lens up the left nostril of my subject (figuratively speaking) has left me with some issues, especially with the IQ180 so clearly diffraction limited at f11 at smallest. Hence, when I got the 40, I got the tilt version. Sure, I had to endure a stern talking to with much finger waving from the Finance Minister, Frau Siebel, but I think it was worth it!
Cheers,
 

cly

Member
Brian, if you don't mind one more question: how much of a problem is the distortion in real life when you do architecture? I can look at the graphs of the Schneider 43mm and the Rodenstock and the Schneider goes to 0.5% and the Rodi to about 1.3% but how often, if it all, should one revert to the Alpa lens corrector if one is really picky? I use the Schneider 43mm which is a wonderful lens but I'm not that happy with the desaturation problem when getting close to the image circle.

Chris
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
I've talked to the best enabler there is about this (Dave G.) and we're going to take the next steps slowly (at least for me). I believe the 180 is in my future and with that I'll have to have a change in lens lineup and it looks like the 40 is it; however, I plan on testing it. There isn't that much of a change in focal length so that should be a major problem for my landscape. My concern is having the room for shifting. Years ago I bought a 28mm thinking I'd have just as much luck with that as I did when using the same focal length on the Mamiya. Again this was back when I first began work with the WRS and quickly found it unusable for me due to lack of shifting (on a P45+).

Okay (and bear with me as this is being typed during my first cup of coffee) if the 40 offers me the same or near same room for movements as the 35 then it's a deal. Now I need to think of t/s. Part of my older training kicks in here and I think I'll go with it as "it's better to have and not need it than to need it and not have it". I have done a few captures where I used multiple captures to stack and makeup for the lack of t/s so I can see myself using it occasionally. (Sandy & I are headed to Death Valley for a week of shooting right after CI in Carmel and will be spending time at the Race track where t/s should come into play.)

Brain - I understand the habit of jamming as I've caught myself doing just that! Also understand the part of getting it past the Finance Minister, in this case Frau Libby! Selling the 35XL with its CF should lessen the burden though.

Nice to hear the 40 being sharper than the 35XL.

I agree with you regarding the differences between the current generation Schneider vs. Rodie lenses. Too many people just google for information and misread what's being said. In the end it takes hands on experience.

Again thanks for the information which has in turn enabled :D me to make a decision (almost).

Don
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Don, I have the 35XL and an IQ180 with a Cambo WDS -

Unfortunately I don't have alternative lenses for the Cambo to compare it with but really I don't think the combination of the 35XL and IQ180 is a winner.

Have looked at getting an alternative lens but really just can't spare the cash to make the change at this point in time.

I would not sell my 35XL for someone to use on an IQ180 because I don't believe they would be happy - as I am not happy with the match.

By the way, it does have a CF and I do use LCCs and C1 v7 - so I think it is getting every chance to shine.


Regards


Mal
Mal - off topic - How are you doing with the wildfires? Any impact?

Don
 

malmac

Member
Don

We are as luck would have it still 500ks from the nearest really bad fires. But that said in Australia where it gets dry quickly and pretty much any where can be in trouble.


Thanks for your concern.


Mal
 

malmac

Member
I am following this thread with interest because I would like to upgrade my 35xl lens. But at present finance minister is furrowing brow, not a good sign. So just trying to be ready for a moment of weakness.

The 32 Rodie being my most likely replacement.

Mal
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Mal - got the files yesterday and will look at them this morning. Many thanks.

The 32 Rodie looks good and on the surface I'd agree with you other than I'm too uncertain on the real-world amount of movements. Can you get 10-15mm movements?

Of course then there's the price :eek:
 
Top